AKHTAR BILLO versus PAKISTAN INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
Arts 199, 9, 23 and 24 Constitutional Jurisdictional Elimination Claims Reasonable Controversy Questions Respondents of the scope filed a lawsuit in respect of the land that the applicant did not claim. What he did at the time of his settlement was a reasonable solution to the contentious land applicants if he was expelled from another country in accordance with the law under the Unlawful Settlement Act, 2005, against the wrongdoing party Had provided a complete procedure so he would request the High Court's constitutional jurisdiction to enforce his right So it is not suitable. The constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court cannot be exercised if there is a reasonable remedy available under the relevant law. The party must take advantage of the provision provided by the statue before filing an order in the nature of a constitution before reporting a violation of law. Jurisdiction In the present case, the question of fact included in the constitutional jurisdiction could not be resolved, but the question of facts could not be resolved by the High Court through the exercise of the constitutional jurisdiction. Was excluded due to, however, the applicant can obtain the remedies available to him by adopting other method. If so
Related judgments — Karachi High Court Sindh, 2014
